On Jun 27, 2012 7:12 AM, "Chris Northwood" <cnorthw...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 26 June 2012 22:07, Adam "Cezar" Jenkins <emperorce...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I have to agree, that's the big one. Though I the ecosystem of 3rd party > > apps is what makes using Django so great. If there is one ORM for 99% of > > the apps out there, and only one that works Mongo, then the only real use > > case of Django is going to be a system where you're using a RDBM > > in combination with Mongo. > > Surely that's what it needs though, an 'ORM' and an 'Object-Document > Mapper' at some point. What's the advantage of trying to shoehorn > MongoDB to work with an ORM, when it's not relational, and as it has > to be hidden behind the same abstraction layer as a RDBMS, you lose > the benefits of it being non-relational?
I agree that they are 2 different concepts (ORM and documents), however the namings in Django API looks like it might work well even for handling documents <=> objects. User.objects.all() User.objects.filter(email=email) Looking at this there is nothing telling about the relational concepts behind it. Of course for all relations operations (foreings, many to many, etc) the api might start to differ . If Django has a support for the basic api but with admin and loging working I think is a good step forward. After that we can wait for a better common sense about relations between documents emerge. We have been waiting this common sense to emerge without any builtin support, maybe with the basic api would have more people involved with. []. Luciano Pacheco -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
